CTNF 18/727,566 CTNF 85264 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification The use of the term Wi-Fi, WiMAX, each of which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized entirely wherever each appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks. 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 06-11-01 AIA The following title is suggested: METHOD, UE AND NETWORK DEVICE FOR COMMUNICATING PDSCHS 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. None of the instant claims invoke U.S.C. 112(f). The term “processor” as claimed is a structural modifier. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 16-20, 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by "Discussion on mechanisms to improve reliability for RRC_CONNECTED UEs," 3GPP DRAFT; R1-2104388, 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE ; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES ; F-06921 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS CEDEX ; FRANCE, vol. RAN WG1, 11 May 2021 (2021-05-11) [provided by Applicant] (“VIVO”) . As to claim 16, see similar rejection to claim 23. The apparatus teaches the method. As to claim 17, VIVO further discloses the method of claim 16, wherein: both the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH are processed, at least based on the UE is capable of receiving the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH which are frequency division multiplexed (page 4, "UE is configured to receive unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH in a slot in FDM manner"); and one of the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH is processed, otherwise (page 4, “for the case a UE is configured to receive more than one multicast PDSCH in a slot in FMD manner, the UE may also need to construct the HARQ-ACK codebook for different multicast PDSCHs separately”). As to claim 18, VIVO further discloses the method of claim 16, wherein: based on one of the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH being processed, a PDSCH to be processed is determined according to comparison a priority of the unicast PDSCH with a priority of the group common PDSCH (page 5, “for the priority comparison between multicast and unicast with the same priority index, for simplicity, the HARQACK for multicast with priority index 0 can equal to the HARQ-ACK for unicast with priority index 0, and the HARQ-ACK for multicast with priority index 1 can equal to the HARQ-ACK for unicast with priority index 1”). As to claim 19, VIVO further discloses the method of claim 18, wherein: the priority of the unicast PDSCH is indicated by downlink control information (DCI) related to scheduling the unicast PDSCH (Page 7, “Priority index can be included in DCI formats scheduling the group-common PDSCH. Similar mechanism as priority indication of unicast HARQ-ACK can be reused, that is, for the dynamically scheduled PDSCH. Priority index can be included in DCI formats scheduling the group-common PDSCH, if there is no priority index indication in the scheduling DCI, the priority index is 0.” , i.e. the DCI without index still indicates the unicast being 0); and the priority of the group common PDSCH is indicated by DCI related to scheduling the group common PDSCH (Page 7, “Priority index can be included in DCI formats scheduling the group-common PDSCH. Similar mechanism as priority indication of unicast HARQ-ACK can be reused, that is. for the dynamically scheduled PDSCH. Priority index can be included in DCI formats scheduling the group-common PDSCH, if there is no priority index indication in the scheduling DCI, the priority index is 0.”). As to claim 20, VIVO further discloses the method of claim 16, wherein: the group common PDSCH corresponds to a multicast SPS (semi-persistent scheduling) PDSCH based on a SPS configuration index which is activated (page 4, “For type 2 HARQ-ACK codebook, the codebook construction depends on the scheduling scheme for groupcommon PDSCH. In the previous meeting, it was agreed to separately count DAI for unicast and DAI for multicast and the first Type-2 HARQ-ACK sub-codebook for unicast precedes the second Type-2 HARQ-ACK subcodebook for multicast. For the case of SPS PDSCH, there may be unicast SPS PDSCH and multicast SPS PDSCH”; page 5, “For SPS POSCH/SPS release, the priority index is RRC configured per SPS configuration” ). As to claim 22, VIVO further discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising: based on both the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH being processed, transmitting HARQ-ACK codebook for the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook is constructed by appending a sub-codebook for the group common PDSCH to a sub-codebook for the unicast PDSCH (page 4, If SPS PDSCH HARQ-ACK codebook is constructed using the first option, then it straight to concatenate the HARQ-ACK codebook for SPS PDSCH by appending HARQ-ACK sub-codebook for SPS after HARQ-ACK sub-codebook for dynamic PDSCH. i.e. HARQ-ACK sub-codebooks are concatenated in the order of HARQACK sub-codebook for unicast for DG PDSCH, HARQ-ACK sub-codebook for multicast for DG PDSCH and HARQ-ACK sub-codebook for unicast and multicast for SPS PDSCH). As to claim 23, VIVO discloses a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (page 1, NR…UE), the UE comprising: at least one transceiver for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal (page 1, UEs to receive Broadcast/Multicast service; UL feedback); and at least one processor for controlling the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor configured to (It is known in the art that a UE has processing hardware to control functions of the UE including those of an antenna): receive a unicast physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (pages 3-4, “FDM-ed unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH”; “HARQ-ACK codebook construction for FDM-ed unicast and multicast in the same slot”); receive a group common PDSCH which is frequency division multiplexed with the unicast PDSCH in a same slot ( pages 3-4, “FDM-ed unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH”; “HARQ-ACK codebook construction for FDM-ed unicast and multicast in the same slot” ); and process at least one unicast PDSCH or group common PDSCH based on UE capability related to capable of reception of the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH which are frequency division multiplexed (page 4, "UE is configured to receive unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH in a slot in FDM manner"). As to claim 24, VIVO discloses a network device in a wireless communication system (page 1, NR…RAN), the network device comprising: at least one transceiver for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal (page 1, UEs to receive Broadcast/Multicast service; UL feedback); and at least one processor for controlling the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor configured to (It is known in the art that a RAN has processing hardware to control functions of the RAN including those of an antenna): transmit a unicast physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH); and transmit a group common PDSCH which is frequency division multiplexed with the unicast PDSCH in a same slot pages 3-4, “FDM-ed unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH”; “HARQ-ACK codebook construction for FDM-ed unicast and multicast in the same slot”, wherein at least one unicast PDSCH or group common PDSCH is processed based on UE capability related to capable of reception of the unicast PDSCH and the group common PDSCH which are frequency division multiplexed (page 4, "UE is configured to receive unicast PDSCH and multicast PDSCH in a slot in FDM manner") . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Discussion on mechanisms to improve reliability for RRC_CONNECTED UEs," 3GPP DRAFT; R1-2104388, 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE ; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES ; F-06921 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS CEDEX ; FRANCE, vol. RAN WG1, 11 May 2021 (2021-05-11) [provided by Applicant] (“VIVO”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0046678 A1 to YANG et al. (“Yang”) . As to claim 21, VIVO does not expressly disclose the method of claim 20, wherein: the same slot is located after a timing of activation of the SPS configuration index. Yang discloses at para. 0160: A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: identifying one or more semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission occasions in a slot; receiving, from a base station (BS) and via a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) activation downlink control information (DCI) configured to activate at the UE a SPS configuration, the SPS configuration including a configuration index and configured to schedule a SPS PDSCH transmission occasion associated with the configuration index; and activating or reactivating, in response to the receiving the SPS activation, the SPS PDSCH transmission occasion associated with the configuration index based on: a separation in symbols between an end of the SPS activation DCI and a start of an earliest SPS PDSCH transmission occasion of the one or more SPS PDSCH transmission occasions in a same slot as the SPS PDSCH transmission occasion associated with the configuration index. Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the configuration index of Yang into the invention of VIVO. The suggestion/motivation would have been for management of overlapping SPS in PDSCH occasions (Yang, para. 0002). Including the configuration index of Yang into the invention of VIVO was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Yang . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2023/0337233 A1 discloses at fig. 39: PDSCH group indexes pertaining to DCI, with ACK feedback. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR J GHOWRWAL whose telephone number is (571)270-5691. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-6:00pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at 571-272-3988. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /OMAR J GHOWRWAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 2 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 3 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 4 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 5 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 6 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 7 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 8 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 10 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 11 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/727,566 Page 12 Art Unit: 2463
Prosecution Insights